0.) Burden of proof.If Morphic fields do not exist, it’s not necessarily possible to be able demonstrate this is the case. As such, my opponent therefore shoulders all of the burden of proof
1.) Pseudoscience.Pro asserts that some vague “field”, that pro does not define or explain, must exist because of a list of four things pro asserts cannot be explained by the laws of physics. Pro doesn’t explain how or why only Morphic fields are an explanation for them; nor presents much than vaguely scientific terminology with no context or additional explanation.
This is clearly meets the definition of pseudoscience[1].
2.) Explanation of is not evidence for Even if pros assertions that aspects of biology cannot currently be explained by the laws of physics were true : that does not mean an alternative explanation is valid.
Magic, fairies, overt control by some malevolent entity through telekinesis are all alternatives. So given that there could be many potential explanations for a given phenomena: that the phenomenon exists cannot be considered evidence of any individual explanation of that phenomenon.
What does provide compelling justification for a given explanation, is its descriptive power:
3.) Not a compelling explanation.General relativity, the original laws of gravity, and other scientific theories to explain occurrences are compelling because they are:
Descriptive: they present a detailed, causal mechanism, that can be applied or used in various scenarios to describe the behaviour that should be seen in a way that can be compared to reality.[2]
Testable: these theories present an explanation that implies other as yet unknown observations can be made: meaning that the existence - or not - can be used to establish the veracity of the claim.[3]
Falsifiable: you can’t prove a theory correct, as there is always possible reasons why other explanations could be better, as a result it must be possible to prove theories wrong.[4]
As a Morphic fields are neither predictive, testable or falsifiable - these fields are not compelling explanations of anything
5.) Pros list.The following is a short rebuttal of pros examples.
5.1) Mathematical rules in natureGeometry and geometric relationships are inherently mathematical, descriptions of forms of growth have a mathematical basis; it seems wholly unsurprising that behaviour, or geometric patterns in nature could be described mathematically, and could be repeated.
5.2.) Swarming behaviour.Pro is 30 years out of date; these behaviours can be explained by simple rules given to each bird or organism based upon what its immediate neighbours are doing; and can be easily simulated using these simple rules without requiring any centralized “morphic field”[5]
5.3.) Colony behaviour Ant and colony behaviour can be described by very basic individual rules and the use of chemical pheromones. They are easily explainable - and we even have a class of algorithms that mimic this behaviour and can be used to solve optimization problems.[6]
5.4.) Morphogenetic fields“Morphogenetic fields” are used to explain why some cells become arms, and some become legs. This is well understood as part of the regulation cascade of the Homoebox genes; and chemical gradients and intracellular signalling mechanisms rather than requiring any discrete or magical field.[7][8]
Conclusion:Pros claim is merely unsupported pseudoscience.
Sources:[1]
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pseudoscience[2]
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Explanatory_power[3]
http://modern-science.blogspot.com/2005/10/untestable-hypothesis-and.html?m=1[4]
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falsifiability[5]
https://cs.stanford.edu/people/eroberts/courses/soco/projects/2008-09/modeling-natural-systems/boids.html[6]
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ant_colony_optimization_algorithms[7]
https://www.edge.org/response-detail/27037[8]
https://academic.oup.com/icb/article/40/5/770/157202
will be further explained in my arguments
it seems like your trying to pick a fight cause you can only win this debate if you come up with a new theory of the universe and how it works. lol
could you explain more?